The REAL cause of Polar Ice Melt



Melting of glaciers and polar ice is being caused by Global Warming and is happening at an alarming rate – so say many scientists and the media; Global Warming is the most serious of many very serious problems.

Some 20 computer models predict rising CO2 levels concurrent with global warming and ice melt and the conclusion that serious problems lie ahead with warmer and violent weather, rising seas, acidification of lakes and seas, extinction of species and our own survival.  Some scientists have pointed to the impact of dust particules on glaciers and snow pack.  More recently attention has been directed to the impact of carbon particulates from ground based sources on health, global warming and particularly melting polar ice.  Their belief is usually based on the “hockey stick” graph of increasing CO2 levels due to burning of carbon fuels in industry, transportation and similar sources.

Environmentalists, those with greatest concern, want immediate laws and action to drastically reduce burning of fossil fuels at any cost to save the planet.  Others point out that such measures will have serious economic consequences altering life as we know it and may not be effective. Consider the history of laws on drug abuse, homicide, simple theft etc.   Naysayers doubt the very foundation of global warming.

Listing a few of many “facts”;

CO2, water vapor and Methane are recognized as global warming gases (GWG) – true

CO2 levels are rising – true

Burning fossil fuels increases CO2 – true

Methane, a greenhouse gas is also increasing – true

More CO2 is now generated than absorbed – probably true

Glacier ice is melting – true

Global warming is occurring – short term, long term?

Therefore; reducing fossil fuel use by utilities and industry will solve global warming – not so fast.

Global Warming is causing Glacier Melt – Whoa.  Let us reason together.

Unfortunately there are several important facts that are overlooked or unappreciated.

Actually there are several separate and important hockey sticks and special conditions that have not been considered. Each of the ‘sticks’ and ‘conditions’ have major impacts on both Ice Melt and Global Warming.  Separating these sources and identifying their impact would increase our understanding and perhaps reduce much of the controversy that prevents gainful action on global warming.

These other factors will not be reduced by efforts to mitigate CO2 emissions from the “industrial revolution” and climate gains from CO2 reduction will be much less than hoped for.

This essay discusses these other factors which are not at the forefront in hopes discussion will result in better understanding and unified action.

Please note that credits for climate related studies is deserved by many individuals; there are neither staff, funds nor time to prepare a bibliography at present and I apologize to all the giants who made this writing possible.


Hockey Stick #1  —  CO2 from the industrial revolution; the current bad boy.

This large and increasing source is the foundation for the CO2 ‘hockey stick’ that is creating so much controversy.  Burning of carbon based coal, oil and gas are blamed for the rise in atmospheric CO2, which is then blamed for causing global warming, glacial and polar ice melt, acidification of the seas, loss of coral reefs, severe weather, and much more.  Increased burning of carbon fuel to CO2 will indeed have an impact on all these problems however release conditions discussed below decreases the impact.

Conditions affecting impact of the CO2 Hockey Stick on global warming.

FACT:  Most sources of CO2 are unique in that they are released at ground level, and disperse below the cloud level.   Stack dispersion models were developed to predict where these individual smoke stack sources would reach ground level and their concentrations down-wind of the source.

Coal burning does not produce water vapor and stack gas is denser than air, tending to settle to ground level, liquid fuels produce one water molecule per CO2 molecule and is nearly equal to air density, while natural gas forms two water molecules per CO2 molecule and is less dense than air. Released close to the ground, this CO2 is subject to absorption into clouds, rain and surface water and by photosynthesis of plants and trees.  North Hemisphere trade winds carry much of the CO2 toward the equator for some 2500 miles before air currents rise to 30,000 to 40,000 feet elevation for transport northward.  At 12 miles per hour, the flue gas, will be in contact with surfaces which absorb the CO2 for 200 hours; 8 days.  Only after this journey will the CO2 rise and flow toward the poles to materially affect either global warming or ice melt.

Hockey Stick #2  —  “Natural” Sources

Termites, fungus, bacteria and animals generate GHG’s, CO2 (40 +/- % ) and methane 60 % from cellulose.  There has been a large increase in domestic cattle which also produce methane and CO2.  There is concern that melting permafrost may release unpredictable large quantities of global warming methane.  CO2 from volcanos are intermittent and while a major release, belong in the “natural” category which cannot be controlled.  Eliminating fossil fuel will not affect this source.

Hockey Stick #3 — CO2 from Aircraft and Jet Engine Exhaust

Jet Aircraft travel which began with the DC 7 airplane in 1958 is very much its own hockey stick and is growing exponentially.   Jet Travel is much higher in the Northern Hemisphere.  While CO2 from power plants and ground transportation in the US and Europe is being reduced CO2 from air travel is increasing rapidly.  One report states Jet Engine CO2 now contributes 1/3 of total CO2.  At jet altitude, air currents to be discussed below convey the CO2 toward the poles with little chance of removal.  More efficient engines will affect but not reverse the increase in CO2 formation.

Further, developing nations are installing coal power plants at very high rates reducing any opportunity to gain on CO2 reduction.

Hockey Stick #4  —  Jet engine particulates

Incomplete combustion in Jet engines introduces major quantities of carbon nano-particles.

These particles, ranging from 10 to 60 nanometers cannot be seen by the most powerful optical microscopes but can be detected, measured and “ seen ” with high powered electron microscopes and laser gas analyzers.  Reports state jet exhaust contains millions of particles per cc. These particles strongly influence the melting of glacier and polar ice and affect global warming.

Jet Engine Particulates and Ice Melt.

Nano particles of carbon ejected by jet aircraft at cruising altitude settle to earth very slowly and are carried by air currents toward the north and south poles.  A study of atmospheric currents and cells reveals why this is so very important.

Trade winds of sailing ship days blow slantwise toward the equator, then rise and flow toward the poles creating and controlling three northern “circulation cells” and three southern “circulation cells” that circulate vertically and to a lesser degree from east to west.  Particles introduced in the Northern Hemisphere are likely to remain in the Northern Hemisphere.

Northern hemispheres “Hadley cell” currents, rise at the equator to 40,000 feet, flow north to about 30° North latitude, where a percentage descends.  Just north of 30°, the “Ferrel cell” flows in reverse direction, northward but at a lower altitude, 20,000 feet, with much of the upper Hadley cell flows continuing northward at the higher 25 to 35 thousand feet elevation.  This cell ends at about 50 ° North where a third circulating cell, the “polar cell” operates.

In combination, these cells create air currents at 20 to 40,000 foot elevation that convey many of the carbon particles to the polar regions where particles descend to settle onto the snow and ice or are adsorbed by precipitation and carried to the surface.  Whether on the surface or embedded in ice or snow, the particles absorb sunlight, which heats and melts the ice.

Ice and snow do not reflect all sunlight and particles below the surface, especially black carbon, will absorb energy and melt surrounding ice, even at some considerable distance below the surface.  The author observed this fact during Northern Wisconsin winters when snow plows mixed road gravel with snow and deposited the mixture on the side of the road.  On sunny days, gravel sank into the snow and continued sinking even when they were no longer in direct sunlight.

The melting caused by particles will continue for more than one season, diminishing gradually as thick layers of particle free ice are deposited above it.  The melted ice water trickles downward to the glaciers base where hydraulic pressure can lift the glacier and float it for a slide downhill.

A further impact of particulates involves cloud and fog formation which have major impacts on heating and cooling.   Two very powerful examples of this effect on climate have already occurred on earth.  London was famous for its fog, as well as its fireplace chimneys  and chimney sweeps.  Once gas fuel was provided and displaced coal, the fog disappeared. The killing fogs of 1952 and 1962 were a deciding factor in providing fuel gas.   A second area with similar transition is the Los Angeles, California area.  Common practice in Los Angeles County prior to 1960 was trash disposal in backyard burners.  These were outlawed in 1957 and soon the heavy winter fog disappeared.  Angelenos have trouble remembering when they last drove in fog while old timers remember getting lost in the heavy night time fog.  Cloud formation is induced by particulates and is a major factor in heat retention.  The author was well aware of this nearly 80 years ago in Northern Wisconsin where frost could be expected during summer months on any night with a full moon and clear skies.  Standard practice included covering all vegetable and flower gardens on those nights and to begin cutting corn fields before leaves dried up from frost damage.

Hockey Stick #4,  Carbon particles and severe weather

The northern jet stream has been reported as moving southward during each summer and then returning northward in winter.  It has also been reported as moving farther south.  In Europe, the stream had been over norther Europe but is now south of the Mediteranean sea. Americas jet stream flows west to east and bends sharply southward over land and east of mountain ranges.  As ice melts at the poles, air currents at ground level in the Ferrell cells become warmer.  This warmer air pushes the jet stream farther south, and likely creates not only cooler days but stormier weather.

Hockey Stick 4,Carbon particulates and global warming

Atmospheric carbon particles do absorb light energy.  This is demonstrated in the inspection instrument which uses laser light energy to heat nano size carbon particles to high temperature for detection and recording.

There are four effects from this absorption of energy;

First, the particle is heated and then heats air in contact with the particle.

Second, The heated particles will radiate heat to earth.

Third;  radiation from earth will be affected because our earth will “see” the particles at – 60 °F  (400 ° Rankine) , rather than outer space at absolute zero, 0 °Rankine.  Whatever portion of the sky is blocked by particulates will reduce radiation by 1/3.  Our good earth has a center core that is much hotter than the surface.  There is a constant flow of heat from that core to the surface and then lost by radiation to outer space.  The loss is affected by a band of carbon particles.

Sun energy adds to the earth energy balance but so much emphasis is placed on CO2 that the earths central firebox and radiation is ignored.

Fourth,  Carbon particles over the poles will be solar heated 24 hours each day during summer increasing their impact at the poles.

FINALLY;   What can be done?

Saving the Glaciers by reducing carbon particulates formed by jet engines.

In my humble opinion, reducing these particles can be done and should be separated from the global warming debate.  This is doable.

1.  Reducing air travel or the need for business trips or the desire for flying is an unlikely possibility.

Earths citizens are hooked on the ease and wonder of flying which encourages world travel.  England has suggested increasing the cost of air travel but is unlikely to act.  Any significant increase would exclude the poor but not deter the rich creating class warfare.

2. Requiring aircraft to always fly below the clouds is simply impossible because of noise, inefficiency, and safety.

3. Modifying jet fuel would be fairly easy. 

Gasoline in California has been modified for years to reduce smog.  Tetraethyl lead was replaced with oxygenate type compounds like MTBE and Ethyl  Alcohol.   Biodiesel ( fatty acid-methyl ester) has been successfully tested in aircraft engines and generates less pollution.   This fuel has two oxygen atoms per molecule and other oxygenate materials can be manufactured.   Biodiesel blends with petroleum diesel and all biodiesel available should be diverted to Jet Fuel Blends.   Biodiesel from algae is advancing but is not commercial.

4. Engine changes to reduce particulate emissions is most desirable and should be pursued diligently. 

In a jet engine, liquid fuel is atomized ( very tiny droplets ) and injected into several combustion chambers.  High temperature vaporizes most of the liquid but also can crack the molecules creating carbon ( coke ).  Hydrocarbon vapors combine with oxygen in hot compressed air to produce CO2 and one molecule of water vapor for each molecule of CO2.  It is possible that each atomized droplet forms a nano-particle of carbon or a cluster of particles, and larger droplets might reduce the number and size of particles but require larger combustion cans.

Other possible engine changes include size and shape of combustion cans; adding catalytic converters which often ‘coke up’ and would need to ‘burned off’ on the ground.  Oil refineries have a long history producing lighter fuels from heavy compounds with “catalytic cracking” and “delayed cokers”.  That knowledge and experience should be appreciated and used.

While jet engine changes could improve combustion this cannot be expected to happen quickly or without major investment.   Replacing complete aircraft with more efficient ones would take still longer though there are attempts to design more efficient, slower planes.

Changing fuel properties could happen more quickly. Jet fuels require high energy density all but eliminating hydrogen.  Biofuels are unique in that they provide a near zero net increase in global CO2 but also burn more cleanly and reduce the troublesome particulates.

Reducing Global Warming

Numerous articles in science journals have discussed the availability and cost of technologies that would eliminate fossil fuels and also eliminate the carbon particles that heat our atmosphere.  None have been developed or are currently capable of providing large amounts of reliable GHG free energy.  Environmentalist opinions often disagree but have not demonstrated that it can be done.   Most depend on heavy government subsidy which means first, diverting limited funds from other ‘necessary’ programs and second, increasing taxes and also cost of energy with serious consequences.

Because reducing CO2 by curtailing fossil fuels is so expensive and disruptive if implemented quickly there is actually only one technology available, and that requires a different approach and mindset.  Smaller nuclear plants with the reactors installed underground, like Minuteman missiles, and using air cooling instead of water cooling could be safe, practical and could be built rather quickly near major users eliminating CO2 and particulate carbon.

In comparison; fusion power has absorbed billions of research dollars but has yet to achieve net power output.  Decades may be required to reach that goal, then more decades to create new materials of construction, then more decades to reduce costs to competitive levels and prove safe operation and perhaps more decades to reduce size to affordable levels.

Wind power does not exist near large users and until superconductivity is available, cost of power lines, cost of voltage drop and cost of storage will limit useful capacity.  Solar needs large cheap storage to avoid building quick start backup plants to support times of zero production.


Of the many possible programs, reducing carbon particulates from jet aircraft has a reasonable chance to save the polar ice and reduce global warming.  The writer encourages all parties to consider this as a path for progress.

Skin Cuts: How I Help Healing

SKIN !! You gotta have SKIN! So says the song. And it heals itself!
However, our amazing skin heals quicker and better with our help.

This is how I help my skin heal cuts; strictly my experience, not a doctors,
and certainly not a medical recommendation for anyone.

My three step Krugler procedure for healing cuts !!

  1. Allow bleeding to flush out bad stuff ( apply pressure if necessary to induce bleeding )
  2. Clean the skin surface with a wet tissue (and sometimes soap);
  3. Press the sides of the cut together; hold and, apply a 3/4”wide POROUS* tape and salve** full length to hold the sides together.

Done; Ignore it for a week or so; no hurry.

No changing; No concerns, get it wet, wash over it, whatever.
After a week, remove the tape and clean up any dried blood.

(* Note 1; Tape must be porous; adhesive tape does not ‘breath’ and prevents healing.
“First Aid paper tape”, or porous tape from band aids works )
(** Note 2: I apply a narrow thin narrow stripe of triple antibiotic salve along the center of the tape,
on the sticky side, before applying tape over the cut. )

Our body has amazing ability to heal cuts!!

Example #1
A scalp cut about 1.5 inches long at 2:00 AM was a bleeding challenge.
I held the sides together with my fingers for an hour to stop the bleeding,
When I checked for bleeding, after an hour, I found the sides ‘stuck’ together; no bleeding.
A week later, I scrubbed out the dried blood and she went to her hair dresser who noted a pink line.
Two weeks later, the hair dresser could not find even the pink line.
(I was amazed that sides of a cut could bond that quickly, but they did )
No Stitches, No Pain, No Bandages, No infection, No scab, No Scar! Really!

Example #2
A 1 inch long ‘cut to the bone’ on the underside of my forearm.
Used the Krugler method, then after a week, removed the tape and washed off dried blood.
My wife ( RN, Bachelor of Science, emergency room experience ) could not tell which arm had been cut.
No Stitches, No Pain, No Bandages, No infection, No scab, No Scar! Really!

I have had many cuts over the years; those that were stitched, had scabs and scars.
None of the cuts repaired with the Krugler method had scabs or obvious scars.
Zero complications, Zero infections and Zero pain. Compare with the published study, below.

Reference on infections after surgery: Search; “Intra-operative handling and wound healing”
M Bhattacharyya, H Bradley; Intra-operative handling and wound healing of arthroscopic portal wounds.

(Percent of 233 wounds by >> Sutures Band Aids “My experience”
Complications 18% 7% 0%
Superficial Infections 2% 0% 0%
Pain 85% 67% 0%

PSA Test: What your doctor does not tell you.

9/24/2012 Posted by Arthur H Krugler



Doctors and Medical Researchers do know a lot; then why the confusion? and fear?
What does the PSA test result actually mean?
Is high equal to cancer? Is low safe?
Should an expensive biopsy be recommended? Especially if greater than 4?
Is a needle biopsy 100% foolproof and without error?
Should radiation treatment with its uncertain outcome be started
Should surgery be recommended?
Or, watch and wait?
Or, for the elderly with very high readings, “ Keep them comfortable till

PSA test values are concentration values from chemical analysis of blood.
C OBSERVATIONS by A H Krugler, a professional chemical engineer.

Just my observations, no more, no less; not a doctor, surgeon, urologist, or radiologist.
An engineers observations over 20 years studying my high and variable PSA test results.

A Prostate Specific Antigen ( PSA ) : a protein produced mainly by the prostate
gland. The PSA Test: A very accurate bio-chemical test for very small
concentrations of the antigen which has migrated into the blood.
The test was released in 1986. See Wikipedia, “PSA” for more complete

B There has been much controversy over attempts to relate the concentration to
cancer or to justify biopsy procedures. This is unfortunate, and in my opinion,

First: The prostate gland produces the antigen ( protein ) continuously and some enters the blood stream where the concentration can be determined by the PSA test. Tests for production rates in the prostate (mg PSA/gm /day) are essential but not available.
Second: The antigen must also be removed from blood continuously to prevent the concentration from going sky high. (As high as a recorded instance of 2,571 with no reported cancer problems.) Urologists know very little about the removal process.
( The Where, How, and Why of Removal and Removal Rates)
Third: The many factors that affect antigen production, transfer rates from gland to blood, and its removal rate make any conclusion depending on PSA concentration alone to be unreliable.
Fourth: Adding the DRE (Digital Rectal Exam ( a Urologist feeling for lumps or hardness in the gland ) does little to help when the prostate gland is enlarged.
Fifth: Adding other blood tests have thus far not led to clear answers. It is difficult to sense small but aggressive tumors inside the soft prostate gland.
Sixth: Biopsy needles do not sample the entire gland leaving areas for tumors to hide.

C Observations by A H Krugler, a Chemical Engineer, during 20 years of monitoring
PSA, DRE’s, a biopsy, and several ultrasound examinations.
1 Total amount of antigen in the blood is very small. An average 160 lb man may have
6 liters of blood; a concentration of 4 mg/liter means a total of .024 grams of the
This would amount to 1/2 of a drop of liquid if the protein were a liquid.
2 Small increases in transfer rates affect test results quickly, easily doubling
blood concentration. PSA results come down much more slowly.
3 Size matters, a larger factory produces more protein and elevates PSA

Prostate size varies from a small walnut to a large grapefruit.
Urologists have a term, “density”; equal to PSA reading divided by size in cubic
centimeters. A result less than .17 has been suggested as “not indicating
Size can be determined by a minor frontal ultrasound examination.
4 Urinary infections: An infection can easily double the concentration in the blood
but it is not known if infection increases the production rate or if the transfer
rate alone is increased. More on cause of infections later.
Antibiotics and sulfa drugs are often prescribed. Stopping the infection does not
result in a rapid drop in PSA concentration. A month or more is required to reach
5 Mechanical pressure;
– A urologist pressing the prostate with a forefinger in search of hard nodules or
tumor growths (DRE) will cause the antigen to be sent into the blood stream.
– Prostate glands compete for space in the lower pelvis region. A large stool
squeezes the gland as it passes through the pelvic region forcing protein into
the blood stream.
– Riding a bicycle can increase concentration.
– Researchers state that ejaculation also forces the antigen into the blood stream.
6 Factors that affect removal of the protein from the blood.
– Please note that removal rates determine PSA levels to a greater extent than
production, but there are no tests to determine this factor. In fact, I have yet
to find a clear answer on how the antigen is removed or used. Studies have
demonstrated that after complete surgical removal of the prostate gland,
approximately one month ( 700 + hours ) is required to reduce the PSA levels to
near zero. During the month the ‘average’ heart will pump 55,000 gallons of blood
equal to 450,000 lbs to remove 0.002 lbs of PSA. ( 4 mg/liter)
This might indicate the protein is not removed in either kidneys or liver but
rather metabolized with other proteins?
– Blood leaving the kidneys cannot be free of PSA. My computer simulation
indicates that levels of PSA would be very very low no matter the amount of PSA
If kidneys do remove PSA, their efficiency would be somewhere near .005% per pass.
– If the body does process this protein with other proteins, removal would depend
on protein content in the diet and protein needs of the body.
7 Age seems to matter. With age, more men develop enlargement of the prostate and
higher test results.
8 Urologists watch these increases in PSA results. The rate of change is called
An increasing number, whether high or low, is cause for concern.

D Reliably detecting tumors in the Prostate Gland with sensitive Ultrasound scanning.
1 The gold standard for detection of cancerous tumors is the needle biopsy.
– Needle biopsies are a very unreliable indicator of the presence of tumors,
especially in enlarged glands. In an enlarged prostate, tumors as large as 30 mm
can be missed in 12 locations by a 7 needle biopsy; the 9 needle biopsy is only
slightly better.
2 Surgeons have stated that all aggressive tumors are ‘bloody messes’ and have
determined that an active tumor sends a signal which the body acknowledges and
creates extra blood arteries and veins to supply the requested blood directly to
the tumor.
3 Ultrasonic instruments have increased their precision and are now able to detect,
not individual capillaries but the aggregate of increased blood levels in a tumor.
Ultrasound photos can be color coded to show the size and location of this
increased blood supply.
4 Tumors can no longer hide nor mask their aggressiveness.
5 More research is required to determine how and how quickly cancers ‘jump’ from the
prostate to other organs or the skeleton where death actually begins.

E Aggressiveness, and Treatment options
1 Urologists use a Gleason Score obtained from biopsies to rate aggressiveness in
recommending a treatment.
2 The author is convinced that color enhanced ultrasound examination is more
reliable, less costly, less danger of infections, no antibiotics, no recovery time,
no damage to the prostate gland. It is time for the medical profession to consider
this option.
3 There are many approaches to cancer treatment; drugs, radiation, surgery, hormones
4 This author has not needed to study treatments nor had the opportunity to observe
5 The authors’ hope is that with a clearer understanding of the prostate condition,
detection might be reliable and treatment selection, when indicated, might be

PSA and Diet

PSA TESTING  —  Further Observations

We all understand piggy banks – put money in daily, it accumulates; take it out ??
What about PSA??  Our prostate puts protein in continuously, it enters our blood and must accumulate unless something takes it out.
   A recent report on the web follows PSA levels in the blood circuit indicating addition after the prostate gland and then removal.  Total PSA and Free PSA is reduced in the liver and Complexed PSA is reduced in the kidneys.   Is it actually ‘removed’ in the liver since the liver does not have a way to dispose of anything, except into bile?  Probably not.
   More likely, along with other proteins from our diet, our liver converts the PSA protein.  Proteins and carbohydrates are converted into fatty acids and triglycerides for storage and use in our cells.  It also oxidizes triglycerides to produce energy.
   Increasing protein in our diet would likely accomplish four things:
   1.   Increase the amount of protein available for body use.
   2    Increase the amount of protein in the blood
   3.   Direct the prostate not to produce unneeded and excess protein.
   4.   Reduce the amount and percent of PSA in the blood stream and lower PSA test results.
My personal history includes  38  PSA tests over 20 years showing a steady rise from 12 to 30’s, then as I significantly increased diet protein, dropping drastically to 17 in six months

Critics may say my history is a single event and insignificant.   Sorry; in Chemical Plants a single explosion is not considered a single insignificant event and only by studying each medical ‘event’ will we be able to understand our complex physiology.

I consider this observation to be uncommon, and perhaps original, because none of my seven urologists have mentioned diet as having any impact on PSA levels.  It was never a factor in their recommending or insisting on repeat biopsies because “with PSA readings of 30’s I must have metastatic cancer”.   Dr Bahn, after my UltraSound, disagreed.   Also I have never read of any researcher or research hospital mentioning diet in their reports on the “newest and latest on the PSA controversy”.

My hope is that this forum can create interest so researchers and urologists use correction factors for PSA readings before drawing conclusions.

Note:   I did not hop from urologist to urologist;  One died, three moved, one ‘walked me to the door’ after realizing he made an error, and I moved once.

Art Krugler    {dob 1927; 38 PSA’s,  hi 36  recent 17.6 ; 280 cc; density .06;  neg. biopsy 1991}